Kedoshim Tehiyu: The Pursuit of Holiness

קדושים תהיו כי קדוש אני יי אלהיכם: איש... – Holy you will be, because Holy am I, Adonai your God!  This introduction to The Levitical Holiness Code, that we will read during our Afternoon Service tomorrow, invites, compels the question: what does it mean to be or to create holiness?  As I reflected this past spring when we read Parashat Kedoshim as part of our Shabbat Torah cycle, though the writer of this well known verse of Torah did not employ the grammatical imperative tense, it reads like an imperative.   It isn’t a choice; it is a demand: “You will be holy!”  Moreover, suspending the masoretic pointing, those marks that entered the text as late as the 10^th century that serve to punctuate the ancient Hebrew, we can read it clearly as a demand upon not just a chosen few but everyone in the community: Holy you shall be,איש , each person!

         According to Baruch Levine, a prominent scholar in the fields of the Ancient Near East and Semitic languages, the exact etymology of the Hebrew root ק-ד-ש  that form the words kadosh and kedoshim, the biblical and modern terms for holy and holiness, is not entirely certain.  It is clear that one of the earliest uses of this Semitic root in the ancient period was as an honorific or professional title of various types of priests and priestesses.  Usage later expanded to describe divine beings, holy persons, sacred place and the cultic objects and rites surrounding worship.  As scholars understand it, in primitive Semitic religions, holiness was not something that could be affected; rather, it was an intrinsic and impersonal quality that was inherent in certain objects.  And, holiness was, more often than not, something to be feared and avoided.

The bible, inclusive of the Holiness Code that we read each year on Yom Kippur afternoon greatly impacted the understanding of holiness.  It is no exaggeration to say that biblical religion revolutionized the concept of kadosh by defining it as an expression of Godliness whose source comes from God, but which can certainly be affected by humanity.  Holiness no longer need be impersonal. To quote Levine who explains the process clearly and succinctly, “Objects, persons, sites and activities that are employed in the service of God derive their sacred character from that relationship.”  Holiness thus becomes as much a human endeavor as a Divine one.  It isn't holy until we are involved.

As the Holiness Code makes clear, holiness is attainable through action.  God is holy, thus we are holy and we further holiness by mimicking godly behavior in the world.  Biblical examples of such behavior include respecting those elders who nurture, protect, and guide us, leaving the corners of our fields for those who are hungry to come and glean, caring for the stranger in our midst, and striving to be fair in all of our dealings.

         By the Rabbinic period, the idea of holiness, of kedoshim, took on an additional nuance: one of separateness or otherness.  The Sifra, a 3^rd, most likely edited into the 4^th century, commentary on the book of Leviticus equates kedoshim with the Hebrew concept of parash, a word that is often defined simply as to be set apart but which has a more forceful connotation than simply something that is separate.  Something that is perush is consciously set apart or purposely made distinct.  Indeed, this Hebrew root can also be used to imply a bursting apart or a piercing, in other words, a quite dramatic separation. 

         Rudolph Otto, the early 20^th century German Lutheran theologian who wrote an enduring work on the concept of holiness entitled Das Heilige, literally The Holy but most often translated in print as, The Idea of the Holy, added the concept of “numinous” to holiness.  The numinous is the non-rational experience of holiness.  The sub-title of his book, Das Heilige, is useful in understanding his approach (this I won’t try in the original German), “On the non-Rational in the Idea of the Divine and its Relation to the Rational.”  The “non-rational” is what is holy for Otto.  Otto defines holiness as that non-rational and mysterious experience that evokes a compelling mix of both great fear/awe and fascination.   Nowhere does he mention action.  No where does he mention discipline.  It is all about faith and specifically for Otto, Christian faith.  He was, recall, a Christian theologian.  His concept of the numinous manifests itself most fully in the acceptance of Christ. 

         The dilemma in defining holiness today, I believe, stems from our blending (and perhaps getting pre-occupied with) both the rabbinic idea of separateness AND Otto’s goal of achieving that mysterious and non-rational religious experience.   At the same time, we seem to have lost complete sight of the tangible and rational biblical approach to creating a sense of holiness in our world.

         We have become over-achievers with regard to the goal of setting apart.  This Rabbinic idea of holiness as something distinct has remained so compelling to us that we have become experts in compartmentalizing that which we deem sacred. We’ve so well segregated Jewish life from everything else in our lives that it becomes an extraordinary juggling act to bring that sense of the sacred, the holy, into our lives.   Synagogues have become drop off places for activity for our children first and true centers of study and worship at best second.  We grow frustrated with worship and adult study because it doesn’t provide us with enough of that immediate sense of the numinous that Otto demands.   Thus, we place it further and further beyond our reach making Jewish life – our religious life - so separate from ourselves that it becomes unfamiliar, even uncomfortable, and sadly on the bottom of our prioritized to do list.

         The solution might just well be found in the ancient words of The Levitical Holiness Code.  The priestly hand doesn’t call for any sense of separateness or loftiness, or even awe for that matter.  The biblical authors call for a standard of practice, for action, for behavior.  Certainly, there are mystical streams in Judaism that place the endeavor of seeking holiness more in line with the rabbinic vision of separateness and even Otto’s vision of awe-filled fascination, but even in those streams, reaching such a heightened mystical level is often an ideal plane not one that is actually achievable or desirable to reach for any length of time.  It is not a realistic (or even safe) destination for humanity, our sages teach us.

         So with Torah as a guide, how do we achieve holiness?  Unlike Dan Cathy and his fellow religious conservatives, I bristle at using the biblical text as a source for almost any modern definition.  The bible is a reflection of an ancient period in our history.  We elevate it to sacred standing because of its import to humanity (reflected by its continued attribution to God by so many) and its historical endurance, but it must be read within the context of historical criticism.   It is a text that has been frozen in time.  Many of its themes, lessons, and ideals can be viewed as timeless, but much of the detail is not. Rather, the details reflect a time that is entirely different from today – and certainly not necessarily better than today. 

That being said, the Torah’s idea that holiness is a God mandated but human endeavor by which we bring godliness and goodness into the world by acting in a manner that elevates society is nothing short of brilliant.  We no longer need to wait for, and then berate ourselves, or our institutions, for not achieving or providing moments of utter and fascinating awe.  To quote Bernard Bamberger, the 20^th century Baltimore born Rabbi who during his career headed both the Central Conference of American Rabbis and the World Union for Progressive Judaism,  “The idea of holiness implies that what we do and what we make of our lives matters not only to us as individuals, not only to society, but to the entire cosmos.” 

It’s the thinking, feeling, and doing that matters. 

Holiness requires action on the part of the individual acting within the context of community.  To paraphrase the first chief Rabbi of the land of Israel, Rav Abraham Kook, the activation of the intellect, both heart and mind, is a pre-requisite for the attainment of holiness.  I disagree with Rudolph Otto that numinous equals holiness.  Numinous puts holiness too far out of reach from most of us and directly contradicts the Jewish idea presented in Leviticus’ Holiness Code.  Holiness is easily attainable. The potential is there for each and every one of us, but it requires conscientious thought and action in order to make this world a better and more civil society for everyone.  It is fully and solely our responsibility:  קדושים תהיו – God commands it!